What does /sci/ think about Stewart. I'm on my first year

brainlet-core

All my calc classes were taught using 8th ed.
It's not great.

brainlet-core: spivak, apostol, courant

genius-core: using stewart whilst recommending rudin on /sci/

>>8753976
im in calc 2 right now and have stewart assigned to me but bought spivak for spare time use. However I don't really have enough time to go through spivak right now so I feel screwed. Should I spend the summer going through spivak and working on the fundamentals or preparing for calc 3? I'm leaning towards going through spivak

>>8753976

if you say that stewart is brainlet-tier, you're either a faggot engineer who wants to sound smart, or you're a faggot math major who sucked at calculus.

if you're even the slightest bit intelligent, you can learn the basics of a topic (particularly a computational topic like calculus) from any book. why bother worrying about textbook quality until you're studying theory? just do a bunch of exercises. if you suck, it's not the book. it's you.

>>8754035
>>8753999
>if you say that stewart is brainlet-tier, you're either a faggot engineer
you got me senpai

File: 1488540376657.jpg (225KB, 1036x1200px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 1036x1200px

There is just one calculus book and it is from APOSTOL.

>>8754035
Spivak's calculus and Stewart's calculus are completely different. You have no idea what you're talking about.

For OP, there's no reason why you should be reading Stewart if you're a math major. Even if you're actually an engineer or something and only care about calculus computationally, there are still far better books than Stewart. I suggest Calculus, One Variable by Salas et al.

Its good
Apostol and Spivak are memes
They just are more proof based, but its still fucking calculus

>>8754069
you don't know what you are talking about.

>>8754069
>more proof based

You mean it's more mathematically rigorous you stupid fucking brainlet

>>8754078
It's only mathematically rigorous if you followed the book with a good professor.

>>8753976
>What does /sci/ think about Stewart

It's alright, but I'd like more it if they elaborated a bit more with their example problems (describing with work what they are doing in each step instead of lumping multiple steps together with a non-descript written summary). They do alright with some example problems, but others--especially the one's that require extensive manipulation--they cut too many corners, so your left wondering how the fuck they evaluated a mess of a function into something far less intimidating (the only explanation being "through simplification we obtain"...).

>>8754064

If you need Spivak's level of rigor to get through calculus, you are a level 100 autist. There is no need for calculus students to be exposed to that kind of mathematical thinking until they are taking intoductory real analysis.

As someone who took proof based calc classes using spivak, and computation based calc classes using stewart, it is my opinion that you learn completely different things from the two books.

Under Spivak you will learn a more rigorous proof based version of calculus but not really learn how to solve any problems you'll see in engineering or anything like that, that isn't to say that you can't learn these from the book but you really won't spend any time on them.

Under Stewart you'll just do a shit load of computation problems, remind me of my high school textbooks.

>>8754303
As an edit, obviously you are learning the same concepts, they're just being used in very different ways.

>>8754290
It's an above average calculus book and many people from all over the world use it. Not really as impenetrable and autistic as ypu make it sound. Not everyone wants to be a numerical monkey.

>>8754306

don't get me wrong, I'm not personally interested in purely applied or computational math either. but at the level where students are taking courses that would use either of those texts, I don't think the students are mature enough to appreciate the differences between the two anyway. it's like asking a professional driver what they prefer between a stock honda civic and a maserati. obviously the professional prefers the maserati for whatever reasons, but if you ask some high school kid to drive both back to back, they wouldn't be able to tell you which one is better, and for what reasons.

File: 1476a2d74dd6d2e9f3ea97fd34d673d4.jpg (93KB, 670x556px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 670x556px

>>8754019

underrated post